Accurate MATLAB Simulink PV System Simulator Based on . . .

179
JPE 11-2-9
Accurate MATLAB Simulink PV System Simulator
Based on a Two-Diode Model
Kashif Ishaque

, Zainal Salam

, and Hamed Taheri

Dept. of Energy Conversion, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia
Abstract
This paper proposes a MATLAB Simulink simulator for photovoltaic (PV) systems. The main contribution of this work is
the utilization of a two-diode model to represent a PV cell. This model is known to have better accuracy at low irradiance levels
which allows for a more accurate prediction of PV system performance. To reduce computational time, the input parameters are
reduced to four and the values of R
p
and R
s
are estimated by an efcient iteration method. Furthermore, all of the inputs to the
simulator are information available on a standard PV module datasheet. The simulator supports large array simulations that can
be interfaced with MPPT algorithms and power electronic converters. The accuracy of the simulator is veried by applying the
model to ve PV modules of different types (multi-crystalline, mono-crystalline, and thin-lm) from various manufacturers. It is
envisaged that the proposed work can be very useful for PV professionals who require a simple, fast and accurate PV simulator
to design their systems.
Key Words: Mono-crystalline, Multi-crystalline, PV module, STC, Thin-lm
I. INTRODUCTION
Large and small scale PV power systems have been com-
mercialized in many countries due to their potential long term
benets, generous fed-in tariff schemes and other attractive
initiatives provided by various governments to promote sus-
tainable green energy. In PV power generation, due to the
high cost of modules, optimal utilization of the available
solar energy has to be ensured. This mandates an accurate
and reliable simulation of designed PV systems prior to
installation.
The most important component that affects the accuracy of a
simulation is the PV cell modeling, which primarily involves
the estimation of the non-linear I-V and P-V characteristics
curves. Though impractical, the simplest model is the single
diode model i.e. a current source in parallel to a diode [1]-
[4]. It only requires three parameters, namely the short-circuit
current (I
sc
), the open circuit voltage (V
oc
) and the diode
ideality factor (a). This model is improved by the inclusion of
one series resistance, R
s
[5]-[10], as shown in Fig.1(a). Despite
its simplicity, this model exhibits serious deciencies when
subjected to temperature variations. An extension of the model
which includes an additional shunt resistance R
p
is shown
in Fig.1 (b) [11]-[15]. Although a signicant improvement is
achieved, this model demands signicant computational effort.
Furthermore its accuracy deteriorates at low irradiance levels,
Manuscript received Jun. 5, 2010; revised Dec. 9, 2010

Corresponding Author: kashif@fkegraduate.utm.my, zainals@fke.utm.my

Tel: +607-5536187, Fax: +607-5566272, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Dept. of Energy Conversion, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Universiti

Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. (a) Solar cell model using single diode model with Rs.. (b) Single
diode model with R
s
and Rp.
especially near V
oc
.
The single diode models were based on the assumption that
the recombination loss in the depletion region is absent. In
a real solar cell, the recombination represents a substantial
loss, especially at low voltages. This cannot be adequately
modeled using a single diode. Consideration of this loss leads
to a more precise model known as the two-diode model [16].
The inclusion of an additional diode increases the parameters.
The main challenge now is to estimate the values of all of the
model parameters while maintaining a reasonable simulation
180 Journal of Power Electronics, Vol. 11, No. 2, March 2011
time. Several computational methods have been proposed [17]-
[20] but in all of these techniques, new additional coefcients
are introduced into the equations, increasing their computa-
tional burdens. Furthermore difculties arise in determining
the initial values of the parameters; in some cases heuristic
solutions need to be sought. Another approach to describe the
two-diode model is by investigating its physical characteristics
such as the electron diffusion coefcient, the minority carriers
lifetime, the intrinsic carrier density and other semiconductor
parameters [21]-[24]. While these models are useful for un-
derstanding the physical behavior of a cell, information about
the semiconductors is not always available in commercial PV
datasheets. Hence a useful PV simulator using such a model
is not feasible because in the majority of the cases the PV
designers are not equipped with detailed knowledge of the
semiconductor processes.
A complete PV system simulation should fulll the follow-
ing criteria: (1) It should be simple and fast but able to accu-
rately predict the I-V and P-V characteristic curves, including
special conditions such as partial shading. (2) It should be
a comprehensive tool which can develop and validate a PV
system design inclusive of the power converter and the MPPT
control. Although existing software packages like PV-Spice,
PV-DesignPro, SolarPro, PVcad, and PVsyst are available on
the market, they are expensive, unnecessarily complex and
rarely support the interfacing of the PV arrays with power
converters [25].
In this paper a fast and accurate PV system simulator
based on the MATLAB-Simulink environment is described.
The availability of the simulator in the MATLAB platform is
seen as an advantage from the perspective of researchers and
practitioners alike because this software has almost become
the de-facto standard in various engineering disciplines. An
important contribution of this work is the incorporation of a
two-diode model as the main engine of the simulator. This
model is known to have better accuracy, especially at low
irradiance levels. As a result, its application allows for a
more accurate prediction of PV system performance espe-
cially during partial shading conditions. However, previous
researchers have avoided the use of this model in their PV
simulators. This is probably due to the signicant increased in
computational time. Another possible reason why this model
has not been used is the insufcient information on certain
semiconductor parameters that characterize a specic module.
In this work we have devised a computational method that
requires only a marginally longer simulation time than the
popular single diode model. The input to the simulator is
information available in a standard PV module datasheet. In
addition, the simulator supports large array simulations that
can be interfaced with MPPT algorithms and actual power
electronic converters. This allows for performance evaluations
when interacting with the other components of a system.
The accurateness of the simulator is veried by applying the
model to ve PV modules of different types (multi-crystalline,
mono-crystalline, and thin-lm) from various manufacturers.
It is envisaged that the proposed work can be very useful for
PV professionals who require a simple, fast and accurate PV
simulator to design their system.
Fig. 2. Two diode model of PV cell.
II. SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT
A. PV Cell Modeling
A more accurate two diode model is depicted in Fig. 2 [16].
Equation (1) describes the output current of the cell:
I = I
PV
I
01
[exp(
V +IR
S
a
1
V
T1
) 1]
I
02
[exp(
V +IR
s
a
2
V
T2
) 1] (
V +IR
s
R
p
) (1)
where I
o1
and I
o2
are the reverse saturation currents of diode
1 and diode 2, V
T1
and V
T2
are the thermal voltages of their
respective diodes, and a
1
and a
2
represent the diode ideal
constants. The I
o2
term in (1), compensates the recombination
loss in the depletion region as described in [26].
Although greater accuracy can be achieved using this model,
it requires the computation of seven parameters, namely I
PV
,
I
o1
, I
o2
, R
p
, R
s
, a
1
and a
2
. To simplify this, several researchers
assumed that a
1
= 1 and a
2
= 2. These values are approxima-
tions of the Schokley-Read-Hall recombination in the space
charge layer of the photodiode [39]. Although this assumption
is widely used it is not always true [27]. As discussed in
the introduction, many attempts have been made to reduce
the computational time of this model. However these attempts
appear to be unsatisfactory.
B. Improved computational method
1) Simplication of the Saturation Current Equation: The
equation for the PV current as a function of temperature and
irradiance can be written as:
I
PV
= (I
PV STC
+K
I
T)
G
G
STC
(2)
where I
PV STC
(in Ampere) is the light generated current under
Standard Test Conditions (STC), T = T T
STC
(in Kelvin,
TSTC =25

C), G is the surface irradiance of the cell and

G
STC
(1000W/m
2
) is the irradiance under STC. The constant
K
i
is the short circuit current coefcient, normally provided
by the manufacturer. The well known diode saturation current
equation [6] is given as:
I
0
= I
0,STC
(
T
STC
T
)
3
exp[
qE
g
ak
(
1
T
STC

1
T
)] (3)
where E
g
is the band gap energy of the semiconductor and
I
0,STC
is the nominal saturation current. An improved equation
to describe the saturation current which considers temperature
variations is given by [15]:
I
0
=
(I
sc STC
+K
I
T)
exp[(V
oc,STC
+K
V
T)/aV
T
] 1
. (4)
Accurate MATLAB Simulink PV System Simulator Based on . . . 181
The constant K
v
is the open circuit voltage coefcient. This
value is available from datasheets. To further simplify the
model, in this work, both of the reverse saturation currents,
I
o1
and I
o2
are set be to equal in magnitude.
I
01
=I
02
=
(I
sc STC
+K
I
T)
exp[(V
oc,STC
+K
V
T)/{(a
1
+a
2
)/p}V
T
] 1
. (5)
The equalization simplies the computation as no itera-
tion is required. As a result, the solution can be obtained
analytically. The diode ideal factors a
1
and a
2
represent the
diffusion and recombination current components, respectively.
In accordance with Shockleys diffusion theory, the diffusion
current, a
1
must be unity [16]. The value of a
2
, however, is
exible. Based on the extensive simulations that were carried
out, it was found that if a
2
1.2, the best match between the
proposed model and the practical I-V curve is obtained. Since
(a
1
+a
2
)/p = 1 and a
1
= 1, it follows that the variable p can
be chosen to be 2.2. The following expression for I
o1
and
I
o2
results in:
I
01
= I
02
=
(I
sc STC
+K
I
T)
exp[(V
oc,n
+K
V
T)/V
T
] 1
. (6)
This generalization can eliminate the ambiguity in selecting
the values of a
1
and a
2
. Using (2) and (5), the ve parameters
of this model can be readily determined, i.e. I
PV
, I
o1
, I
o2
, a
1
and a
2
. Furthermore, the iteration process to compute I
01
and
I
02
is avoided, resulting in a reduced computing time.
2) Determination of the R
p
and R
s
Values: The remaining
two parameters, i.e. R
p
and R
s
are obtained through iteration.
Several researchers have estimated these two parameters inde-
pendently, but the results are unsatisfactory. In this work, R
p
and R
s
are calculated simultaneously, similar to the procedure
proposed in [15]. This approach has not been applied to a
two-diode model. The idea is to maximize the power point
(P
mp
) matching; i.e. to match the calculated peak power (P
mp,C
)
and the experimental (from the manufacturers datasheet) peak
power (P
mp,E
) by iteratively increasing the value of R
s
while
simultaneously calculating the value of R
p
. From (1) under the
maximum power point condition, the expression of R
p
can be
rearranged and rewritten as:
R
p
=
V
mp
(V
mp
+I
m
R
s
)
[V
mp
{I
PV
I
d1
I
d2
}P
max,E
]
(7)
where
I
d1
= I
01
[exp(
V +IRs
a
1
V
T1
) 1] (8)
and
I
d2
= I
02
[exp(
V +IR
s
a
2
V
T2
) 1]. (9)
The initial conditions for both resistances are given below:
R
so
= 0; R
po
=
V
mp
I
scn
I
mp

V
ocn
V
mp
I
mp
(10)
Fig. 3 depicts the mechanism of the iteration to obtain
the correct R
s
value. Two types of PV modules, Kyocera
KC200GT [28] and Solarex MSX-60 [29] were chosen for
illustration. In every case, R
s
is increased until P
max,C
becomes
exactly equal to P
max,E
. Meanwhile, for each iteration, the
value of R
p
is calculated simultaneously using (7).
Fig. 3. Matching P-V curves methodology for three PV modules.
Fig. 4. Matching I-V curves for KC200GT and MSX-60 modules.
The nal matched I-V curves for the two PV modules are
shown in Fig. 4. As can be observed the three important points,
namely I
sc,
, P
mp
(V
mp
, I
mp
) and V
oc
strongly agree with the
manufacturer data. With the availability of all seven param-
eters, the output current of the cell can now be determined
using the standard Newton-Raphson method. The owchart
that describes the P
mp
matching algorithm is given in Fig. 5.
C. Large Array Simulation
In a typical installation of a large PV power generation
system, the modules are congured in a series parallel struc-
ture (i.e. N
ss
N
pp
modules), as depicted in Fig. 6. To handle
such cases, the output current equation given in (11) has to be
modied as follows:
I = I
PV
N
pp
I
01
N
pp
_

_
exp
_
_
_
_
V +IR
s
_
N
ss
N
pp
_
a
1
V
T
N
ss
_
_
_
_
1
_

I
02
N
pp
_

_
exp
_
_
_
_
V +IR
s
_
N
ss
N
pp
_
a
2
V
T
N
ss
_
_
_
_
1
_

_
_
_
_
V +IR
s
_
N
ss
N
pp
_
R
p
_
N
ss
N
pp
_
_
_
_
_
(11)
where I
PV
, I
01
, I
02
, R
p
, R
s
, a
1
, a
2
are the parameters of the indi-
vidual modules.
Fig. 7 shows a building block of a PV array for any number
of series parallel connections. The inputs for a two diode
model are designed as a template shown in Fig. 8 (a). All of the
parameters for the inputs are available from the manufactures
182 Journal of Power Electronics, Vol. 11, No. 2, March 2011
Fig. 5. Matching Algorithm.
Fig. 6. Series parallel combination in PV array.
datasheet. A mask implementation two diode PV simulator is
shown in Fig. 8 (b).
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Verication of the Two Diode Model
The two diode model described in this paper is validated
by the measured parameters of selected PV modules. Five
modules of different brands/models are utilized for verica-
tion; these include the multi- and mono-crystalline as well
as the thin-lm types. The specications of the modules
are summarized in Table I. The computational results are
compared with the R
s
[6] and R
p
[15] models. Note that these
two models are shown in Figs. 1(a) and (b), respectively.
Table II shows the parameters of the proposed two-diode
model. Although it has more variables, the actual number of
parameters to be computed is only four because I
o1
=I
o1
while
a
1
and a
2
can be chosen arbitrarily from (5).
Fig. 9 shows the I-V curves for a KC200GT module (single),
for different levels of irradiation (per unit quantity: Sun=1
equivalent to 1000W/m2). The calculated values from the
proposed two-diode and R
p
- models are evaluated against the
measured data from the manufacturers datasheet. Comparison
with the R
s
-model is not included to avoid overcrowding of the
plot. However, the results for the R
s
-model will be analyzed
later in the performance evaluation of the three models.
Fig. 7. PV simulator Block in Simulink.
(a) (b)
Fig. 8. (a) Input parameter window. (b) mask implementation of PV simulator.
The proposed two-diode model and the R
p
-model exhibit
similar results under STC. This is to be expected because
both models use similar maximum power matching algorithms
to evaluate the model parameters under STC. However, as
irradiance gets lower, more accurate results are obtained
from the two-diode model, especially in the vicinity of the
open circuit voltage. At V
oc
, the R
p
-model shows a departure
from the experimental data, suggesting that the R
p
-model is
inadequate when dealing with low irradiance levels. This is
envisaged to have signicant implications during periods of
partial shading.
The performance of the models when subjected to temper-
ature variations is considered next. All of measurements are
conducted under the STC irradiance of 1000W/m2. The pro-
posed model is compared with the R
s
-model. This comparison
was specically chosen to highlight the signicant problems
with the R
s
-model when subjected to temperature variations.
The R
p
-model is not shown for the sake of simplicity, but
it will be included later in an analysis that compares all
three models together. Two modules are tested, namely the
KC200GT and the MSX-60. As can be seen in Figs. 10
and 11, respectively, the I-V curves computed by the two-
diode model accurately match the experimental data for all
Accurate MATLAB Simulink PV System Simulator Based on . . . 183
TABLE I
TABLE ISTC SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE THREE MODULES USED IN THE EXPERIMENTS
Parameter Multi-Crystalline Mono-Crystalline Thin-Film
BP Solar
MSX-60
Kyocera
KG200GT
Shell
S36
Shell
SP-70
Shell
ST40
I
sc
3.8 A 8.21 A 2.3 A 4.7 A 2.68 A
V
oc
21.1 V 32.9 V 21.4 V 21.4 V 23.3 V
I
mp
3.5 A 7.61 A 2.18 A 4.25 A 2.41 A
V
mp
17.1V 26.3 V 16.5 V 16.5 V 16.6 V
K
v
80 mV/

C 123 mV/

C 76 mV/

C 76 mV/

C 100 mV/

C
K
i
3 mA/oC 3.18 mA/

C 1 mA/

C 2 mA/

C 0.35 mA/

C
N
s
36 54 36 36 36
TABLE II
PARAMETERS FOR THE PROPOSED TWO-DIODE MODEL
Parameter Multi-Crystalline Mono-Crystalline Thin-Film
BP Solar
MSX-60
Kyocera
KG200GT
Shell
S36
Shell
SP-70
Shell
ST40
I
sc
3.8 A 8.21 A 2.3 A 4.7 A 2.68 A
V
oc
21.1 V 32.9 V 21.4 V 21.4 V 23.3 V
I
mp
3.5 A 7.61 A 2.16 A 4.24 A 2.41 A
V
mp
17.1V 26.3 V 16.7 V 16.5 V 16.6 V
I
o1
= I
o2
4.70410
10
A 4.21810
10
A 2.05910
10
A 4.20610
10
A 3.0710
11
A
I
PV
3.80 A 8.21 A 2.3 A 4.7 A 2.68A
R
p
R
s
176.4
0.35
160.5
0.32
806.4
0.89
91
0.51
211.7
1.76
Fig. 9. I-V curves of R
p
-Model and proposed two-diode model of the
KC200GT PV module for several Irradiation levels.
Fig. 10. I-V curves of R
s
and proposed two-diode model of the KC200GT
PV module for several temperature levels.
temperature conditions. In contrast, at higher temperature, the
results from the R
s
-model deviate from the measured values
quite signicantly.
Fig. 12 shows an analyses of the relative error of V
oc
and
the maximum power point P
mp
for a KC200GT module at
Fig. 11. I-V curves of R
s
and proposed two-diode model of the MSX 60 PV
module for several temperature levels @ 1KW/m
2
.
different irradiance levels. The temperature is set to STC.
The relative error is dened as the difference between the
simulated and the measured V
oc
and P
mp
values. The difference
is then divided by the measured value. As can be seen, under
the STC irradiance level, there is a very small difference
in the V
oc
values among the three models. However as the
irradiance is reduced, signicant deviations are observed with
the R
s
and R
p
-models. Similar results can be seen for the P
mp
.
On the other hand, the proposed two-diode model accurately
calculates P
mp
under all irradiance levels.
Fig. 13 shows the performance of the three models when
subjected to variations in module temperature. The irradiance
is set to STC. There is no signicant difference between the
R
p
and the two-diode models. However the R
s
model exhibits
poor performance in both V
oc
and P
mp
calculations.
To show the effectiveness of the models for different silicon
technologies, comparisons between a S36 (mono-crystalline),
a SP70 (multi-crystalline), and a ST40 (thin-lm) are carried
out. All of these modules where manufactured by Shell
[30]. For this test, the irradiance is maintained constant at
184 Journal of Power Electronics, Vol. 11, No. 2, March 2011
(a)
(b)
Fig. 12. Relative error for V
oc
and P
mp
, for R
s
, R
p
and the proposed two-diode
model for KC200GT PV module.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 13. Relative error for V
oc
and P
mp
, for R
s
, R
p
and the proposed two-diode
model for KC200GT PV module.
STC. Fig. 14 shows the relative error in P
mp
for a wide
variation in temperature (25

C to +50

C). From the data,

it can be concluded that more accurate results are obtained
from the two-diode model for all of the silicon technologies.
Furthermore, it can be seen that using the Rs-model results in
considerably more errors in the calculation of V
mp
and P
mp
.
This is particularly severe for the thin lm technology.
Fig.15 depicts a comparison of all three modeling tech-
niques when the irradiance is varied from 1000 to 200 W/m
2
.
A temperature of 25

C is maintained in these analyses. As

can be seen, better results are obtained with the proposed two-
diode model. As expected, the R
s
-model shows a signicant
variation with the ST40 PV module.
The extensive experimental verication above proves that
the two diode model is superior to the R
s
and R
p
single diode
models. This justies its usage in the proposed simulator.
B. Large System Simulation
The simulator can be used to simulate a large PV array
conguration by simply dening the inputs N
ss
and N
pp
to
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 14. Relative error for P
mp
of Rs, R
p
and the proposed two-diode model
for temperature variation. (a) S36. (b) SP70 (c) ST40.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 15. Relative error for P
mp
of R
s
, R
p
and the proposed two-diode model
for irradiance variation. (a) S36. (b) SP70. (c) ST40.
be the number of modules in series and parallel, respectively.
Figs. 16 (a) and (b) show the I-V and P-V curves generated
by the simulator for a 30 10 array using KC200GT mod-
ules at different irradiance levels. The effects of temperature
variations are shown in Figs. 17 (a) and (b). As can be
seen, the shapes of the I-V curves are exactly equivalent
to the single module curves shown in Figs. 9 and 10. The
current, voltage and power are correctly scaled according to
the array conguration. It is worth noting that the simulation
time is independent of the array conguration, i.e. it makes
no differences in terms of computation time, for any number
of series and parallel connected modules.
Due to partial shading or module mismatch, there exists the
possibility of multiple local maxima instead of a single M
pp
.
A PV simulator should be capable of handling the effects of
Accurate MATLAB Simulink PV System Simulator Based on . . . 185
(a)
(b)
Fig. 16. (a) I-V curves. (b) P-V curves for KC200GT in 5010 conguration
for different irradiation levels from PV simulator.
such events. Fig. 18 shows an application of the simulator
for a typical partial shading condition. In this example, three
shading patterns, i.e. G=1, G=0.75 and G=0.5 are applied
to the group of modules A, B, and C. Fig. 19 (a) and (b)
show the resulting I-V and P-V curves for the above shading
patterns.
C. Simulation with Converter and Controller
The capability of the simulator to interface with power
electronics converters is illustrate in Fig. 20, in which the
simulation of a grid connected PV system involving a boost-
type dc-dc converter (with a MPPT controller) and an inverter
is carried out. The PV modules are KC2000GT congured in
a 62 array. The boost converter and inverter are designed
using an averaging model [31]. For the boost converter, an
input series winding resistance of 0.5 and an output current
(source) of 30mA are used to model the conduction and
switching losses, respectively. In the same manner, an output
series winding resistance of 0.8 and an output current source
of 40mA are used in the inverter to model the conduction
and switching losses. A DC link capacitor (500F) provides
the energy storage necessary to balance the instantaneous
power delivered to the grid. The capacitor value is calculated
(a)
(b)
Fig. 17. (a) I-V curves. (b) P-V curves for KC200GT in 5010 conguration
for different temperature levels from PV simulator.
Fig. 18. A PV array illustration for the partial shading condition
(=1000W/m
2
).
based on an 8% ripple in the V
DC
. In the steady-state condi-
tion, I
RMSre f
is adjusted by the current controller to equalize
V
DC
= V
DCre f
. The error signal then goes to zero and the
average power P
ac
delivered to the AC grid matches the power
generated by the PV array. The MPPT controller utilizes a
conventional perturbation and observe (P&O) algorithm. The
results of the MPPT controller actions are shown in Fig. 21.
As can be seen in Fig. 21 (a)-(c), until t = 0.05s, at
which point shading occurs, the MPPT controller calculates
the correct V
mp
voltage (26.3 6

= 157.8V) and I
mp
current
(7.62

=15.2A), respectively, corresponding to the maximum

power point. Due to shading of the PV array (at t = 0.05
s), the conventional P&O algorithm traps the local maximum.
186 Journal of Power Electronics, Vol. 11, No. 2, March 2011
(a)
(b)
Fig. 19. (a)-(b) I-V and P-V characteristics for the shading pattern of gure
18.
Fig. 20. Grid connected system interfacing with PV simulator.
This condition leads to a decrease in the output voltage of
the boost converter, as shown in Fig. 22 (a). Moreover, the
AC output power is almost equal to the input power as shown
in Fig. 22(c). The expected 120Hz ripple (twice the mains
frequency) at the output of the Boost converter is also evident.
This exercise proves the accurateness of the simulator.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a MATLAB Simulink PV system simulator
based on an improved two-diode model is proposed. To reduce
the computational time, the input parameters are reduced to
four and the values of R
p
and R
s
are estimated by an efcient
iteration method. Furthermore the inputs to the simulator
are information available on standard PV module datasheets.
The simulator supports large array simulations that can be
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 21. (a)-(c) Output voltage, current, and output power from the PV array
using P&O algorithm.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 22. (a)-(b) Output voltage and output power from the boost converter. (c)
AC input (solid) and output power (dotted).
interfaced with MPPT algorithms and actual power electronic
converters. The accurateness of the simulator is veried with
ve PV modules of different types (multi-crystalline, mono-
crystalline and thin-lm) from various manufacturers. It is
observed that the two-diode model is superior to the R
p
and R
s
models. Furthermore, a complete grid connected PV system,
together with power converters and controllers is simulated.
The results are found to be to be in close agreement with the
theoretical predictions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia for providing the facilities and a research grant to
conduct this research.
REFERENCES
[1] M. C. Glass, Improved solar array power point model with SPICE
realization, in Proc. IECEC, Vol. 1, pp. 286291, Aug. 1996.
Accurate MATLAB Simulink PV System Simulator Based on . . . 187
[2] Y. T. Tan, D. S. Kirschen, and N. Jenkins, A model of PV generation
suitable for stability analysis, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., Vol. 19,
No. 4, pp. 748755, Dec. 2004.
[3] A. Kajihara and A. T. Harakawa, Model of photovoltaic cell circuits
under partial shading, in Proc. ICIT, pp. 866870, 2005.
[4] N. D. Benavides and P. L. Chapman, Modeling the effect of voltage
ripple on the power output of photovoltaic modules, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., Vol. 55, No. 7, pp. 26382643, Jul. 2008.
[5] W. Xiao, W. G. Dunford, and A. Capel, A novel modeling method for
photovoltaic cells, in Proc. PESC, Vol. 3, pp. 19501956, 2004.
[6] G. Walker, Evaluating MPPT converter topologies using a matlab PV
model, J. Elect. Electron. Eng., Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 4555, 2001.
[7] F. Gonz alez-Longatt, Model of photovoltaic module in MatlabTM, II
CIBELEC, 2005.
[8] N. Celik and N. Acikgoz, Modelling and experimental verication of
the operating current of mono-crystalline photovoltaic modules using
four- and ve-parameter models, Applied Energy, Vol. 84, No. 1, pp.
115, Jan. 2007.
[9] Y. C. Kuo, T.-J. Liang, and J.-F. Chen, Novel maximum-power-point
tracking controller for photovoltaic energy conversion system, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 594601, Jun. 2001.
[10] Y. Yusof, S. H. Sayuti, M. Abdul Latif, and M. Z. C. Wanik, Mod-
eling and simulation of maximum power point tracker for photovoltaic
system, in Proc. PEC, pp. 8893, 2004.
[11] C. Carrero, J.Amador, and S. Arnaltes, Asingle procedure for helping
PV designers to select silicon PV module and evaluate the loss resis-
tances, Renewable Energy, Vol. 32, No. 15, pp. 25792589, Dec. 2007.
[12] S. Liu and R. A. Dougal, Dynamic multiphysics model for solar array,
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 285294, Jun. 2002.
[13] S. Yadir, M. Benhmida, M. Sidki, E. Assaid, and M. Khaidar, New
method for extracting the model physical parameters of solar cell using
explicit analytic solutions of current-voltage equation, in Proc. ICM,
pp. 390393, 2009.
[14] S. Aazou and E. M. Assaid, Modeling real photovoltaic solar cell using
Maple, in Proc. ICM, pp. 394397, 2009.
[15] M. G. Villalva, J. R. Gazoli, and E. R. Filho, Comprehensive approach
to modeling and simulation of photovoltaic arrays, IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., Vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 11981208, May 2009.
[16] C. Sah, R. N. Noyce, and W. Shockley, Carrier generation and recom-
bination in p-n junctions and p-n junction characteristics, in Proc. IRE,
Vol. 45, No, 9, pp. 1228-1243, 1957.
[17] A. Gow and C. D. Manning, Development of a photovoltaic array model
for use in power-electronics simulation studies, IEE Proc. Elect. Power
Appl., Vol. 146, No. 2, pp. 193200, 1999.
[18] J. A. Gow and C. D. Manning, Development of a model for photovoltaic
arrays suitable for use in simulation studies of solar energy conversion
systems, in Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Power Electron. Variable Speed Drives,
pp. 6974, 1996.
[19] S. Chowdhury, G. A. Taylor, S. P. Chowdhury, A. K. Saha, and Y. H.
Song, Modelling, simulation and performance analysis of a PV array
in an embedded environment, in Proc. UPEC, pp. 781785, 2007.
[20] A. Hovinen, Fitting of the Solar Cell /V-curve to the Two Diode
Model, Physica Scripta, Vol. T54, pp. 175-176, Jun. 1994.
[21] J. Hyvarinen and J. Karila, New analysis method for crystalline
siliconcells, in Proc. WCPEC, Vol. 2, pp. 15211524, 2003.
[22] K. Kurobe and H. Matsunami, New two-diode model for detailed
analysis of multicrystalline silicon solar cells, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Vol,
44, pp. 8314-8321, Dec. 2005.
[23] K. Nishioka, N. Sakitani, K. Kurobe, Y. Yamamoto, Y. Ishikawa, Y.
Uraoka, and T. Fuyuki, Analysis of the temperature characteristics in
polycrystalline si solar cells using modied equivalent circuit model,
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Vol, 42, pp. 7175-7179, Dec. 2003.
[24] K. Nishioka, N. Sakitani,Y. Uraoka, and T. Fuyuki, Analysis of mul-
ticrystalline silicon solar cells by modied 3-diode equivalent circuit
model taking leakage current through periphery into consideration,
Solar Energy Mater. Solar Cells, Vol. 91, No. 13, pp. 12221227, Aug.
2007.
[25] H. Patel and V. Agarwal, MATLAB-based modeling to study the effects
of partial shading on PV array characteristics, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 302310, Mar. 2008.
[26] D. Archer and R. Hill, Clean electricity from photovoltaics, Series on
Photoconversion of Solar Energy, Imperial College Press, pp. 868, Jun.
2001.
[27] McIntosh KR, Altermatt PP, Heiser G., Depletion-region recombination
in silicon solar cells: when does mDR=2?,. in Proc. 16th European
Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conf. pp. 251-254, 2000.
[28] KC200GT High Efciency Multicrystal Photovoltaic Module Datasheet
Kyocera - http://www.kyocera. com.sg/products/ solar/pdf/kc200gt.pdf.
[29] Solarex MSX60 and MSX64 Solar Arrays Datasheet -
http://www.californiasolarcenter.org/newssh/pdfs/solarex-MSX64.pdf.
[30] Shell Solar Product Information Sheet.
[31] Introduction to power electronics course notes, ECEN 2060 -
http://ecee.colorado.edu/ecen2060/matlab.html, 2008.
Kashif Ishaque received his B.E. in Industrial Elec-
tronics Engineering from Institute of Industrial Electron-
ics Engineering, NEDUET, Karachi, Pakistan, in 2007,
and his M.E. in Mechatronics and Automatic Control in
2009 from the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM),
Malaysia, where he is currently working toward his
Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering. He is a lecturer at the
PAF Karachi Institute of Economics and Technology
(PAF-KIET), Karachi, Pakistan. His research interests
include photovoltaic modeling and control, intelligent control, nonlinear
systems control and optimization techniques such as genetic algorithm (GA),
particle swarm optimization (PSO) and differential evolution (DE).
Zainal Salam obtained his B.S., M.E. and Ph.D. from
the University of California, the Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) and the University of Birmingham,
UK, in 1985, 1989 and 1997, respectively. He has been
a lecturer at UTM for 24 years and is now a Profes-
sor of Power Electronics in the School of Electrical
Engineering. He has been working on several research
and consulting projects in the area of battery powered
converters. Currently he is the Director of the Inverter
Quality Control Center (IQCC) at UTM which is responsible for testing PV
inverters that are to be connected to the local utility grid. His research interests
include all areas of power electronics, renewable energy, power electronics and
machine control.
Hamed Taheri was born in Babol, Iran in 1985. He
received his B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the
University of Mazandaran, Iran, in 2009. Currently he
is working toward his M.E. in Electrical Engineering
at the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Malaysia.
He is an Assistant in the Inverter Quality Control
Center (IQCC) UTM which is responsible for testing
PV inverters that are to be connected to the local utility
grid. His research interests include the maximum power
point tracking control of photovoltaic systems, power systems, power quality,
transformers and power electronics.